Mueller Backers Should Be Confronted with His Past Hedging on Government Killing American Citizens on U.S. Soil

What’s there to be “unclear” about? This is the guy determining the fitness of others to govern? And politicians and the media are OK with that?

With the “official” media, Democrats and establishment Republicans forming a protective circle around U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller, both he and his backers appear to have conveniently forgotten a past controversy that goes to the heart of government accepting Constitutional restraints on its power: How can anyone who took the oath be uncertain on whether or not the Constitution supports targeting American citizens for premeditated assassination on U.S. soil? Especially if that person is in a position of great power, and supposedly the top federal cop?

Searching for information on a different story, I came across this “blast from the past” on my The War on Guns blog. It appears to have sparked some initial and contained outrage on Fox News, but then was allowed to disappear and be forgotten by those who wanted that outcome (you can still search for it,but that assumes you know about it in the first place).

“Does that only apply to a U.S. citizen that’s overseas, or does that apply to a U.S. citizen that’s here?” Rep. Kevin Yoder asked then FBI Director Mueller about an order from Attorney General Eric holder authorizing the assassination of Americans fighting on the side of “terrorists.”

“I’d have to go back, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller replied.

Watch for yourself:

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=”https://youtu.be/_YGAUU3umCA”]

Think about that and what it means about any orders he – or those working for him whose careers depend on carrying them out – would not obey. It makes it fair to ask if the so-called “Deep State” succeeds in its coup against the duly elected president and if patriots refuse to accept that, does Mueller think assassinating them would be Constitutional? And do his supporters think his hedging was in any way excusable?

Funny how none of the media or the “bipartisan pushers” praising the guy think any concerns over this are worth remembering, let alone mentioning. Maybe it’s time to start badgering for public statements from his backers, starting with career poltroons Thom Tillis and Lindsey Graham.

And as long as we’re taking a stroll down Memory Lane, Mike Vanderboegh had some Fast and Furious questions that have never been satisfactorily resolved, either. Like what was the FBI under Mueller’s role in “covering up the true circumstances of the murder of Brian Terry”?

David Codrea blogs at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance (WarOnGuns.com), and is a field editor/columnist for GUNS Magazine. Named “Journalist of the Year” in 2011 by the Second Amendment Foundation for his groundbreaking work on the “Fast and Furious” ATF “gunwalking” scandal, he is a frequent event speaker and guest on national radio and television programs.

“Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”
— Frederick Douglass, civil rights activist, Aug. 4, 1857
I know I reached my level of tolerance years ago. However, I’ve found that most are willing to be backed into that corner when there is no hope of victory.
I also know that there are numerous members of society that hope for more abuse, but in their eyes it is some form of justice.
When is it that we actually begin to sue for justice?
I’m confused by organizations such as this, the NRA, and GOA with manpower. I know that there are logical answers in those numbers, but I’ve heard of few who walk the path that might just prevent a bloody revolution.

A point of historical, and legal fact on grand juries. Some time in the 60’s, I believe the change started wherein the grand jury started to loose its power, and became part of the judiciary. The SC eventually diminished the authority of the jury, and rendered as nothing more than a rubber stamp for prosecutors, and the state.
Prior to that, the grand jury was an independent body that investigated, subpoenaed, questioned, and deliberated on all the facts.
There should be no judge, or prosecutor controlling the conduct, or the evidence of a body that was designed to protect the people from “pretended offences”.
What we have today is a completely corrupt judicial system that we essentially embrace by our silence.

The US Constitution does not assign the Grand Jury, or Grand Jury Investigations to any branch or office within a branch, it is a tool of the American people – that is how out of whack things have become – “citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. ” WE the People of the United States call up the Grand Jury, we can also initiate without asking any who serve within our governments to investigate anything we want investigated to find out the facts.

Grand Jury – “The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”.

“Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” (Misbehavior, “Good Behaviour” requirement)

“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.”

“Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”

“The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.”

“Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge”.

“Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” (Nor would it be lawful of them to do so.) Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992)

There ia NO Doubt the Democratic party has been infiltrated enmasse by hard core communists… CPUSA (Communist Party USA)acknowledged this fact yrs ago when they stopped entering a candidate in every Presidential election. They’ve said in their own words “The Democratic Party has the same values & beliefs as the Communist Party, there is no longer a .need to have a separate candidate, we are working with & within the Democratic party to advance the Communist Agenda” With that being the case, I can only pray that the “OathKeepers” have a plan to deal with what is an extremely Dangerois Domestic enemy… I have my doubts .. it is very sad to see the amount of damave the Obama regime inflicted on America.. We may be armed, but i’m not holding my breath,especially afterseeing the oval office usurped by a fraud who paid millions to hide his past while those who may have been able to stop it.. stood by & allowed it to happen ..

I saw a Communist Party brochure in the late 60s/early 70s announcing their plans. Taking over one of the major political parties was one goal, as was infiltrating our public schools and indoctrinating our children.

A few weeks after the Boston Marathon Bombing, Ibriham Todeshev was murdered by FBI Special Agent Aaron McFarlane in a Orlando, FL. Special Agent McFarlane came to the FBI from the Oakland California Police Department where he had been under investigation as a member of The Riders, an OPD vigilante group. The complete story requires reading back issues of the Boston Globe, the Orlando Sentinal, and the Oakland Tribune. Six in the chest and one in the head according to an Orange County, FL morgue employee who sent pictures to Todeshev’s father in Chechnya. The FBI had rulled this a justifiable homacide (number 150 out of 150 investigated). When the Florida State Attorney General for Orange and Osceola Counties requested to interview McFarlane the FBI refused but did send him the transcripts of their interview. Through what appears to be ‘creative incompetence” the transcripts were redacted with a draw program andnposted online. The redactions layer was removed in a matter of minutes and all the police officers involved were exposed. McFarlane, contrary to FBI policy, was alone in the room with Todeshev. It appears Todeshev turned a table toward McFarlane as the only shield he could find when the Special Agen started firing at his chest.